Stuck? 
support@mecway.com
support@mecway.com
Mecway
FEA
Victor
About
- Username
- Victor
- Joined
- Visits
- 4,652
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
@cashan Those are indeed limitations. I looked into beam offset once but somehow didn't implement it. Perhaps it was too difficult. Just one other suggestion - there is shell offset which you might be able to use instead of all the stiffeners have …
-
Regarding beam elements. Mecway isn't much better than LISA in that area. Though it allows L-section beams, they have the limitation of no bending-twisting coupling, which I think may be the same as LISA. The tools for manually building plate meshe…
-
Yes, it's a regression when the solution has more elements than the model, sorry. * In v13, additional elements would end up in some arbitrary component and fewer elements would cause a crash. * In v14, both additional and fewer elements cause …
-
Not automatically. But I guess you know that you can do each time step one by one? Whichever time step is currently shown in the solution is where the temperatures are taken from.
-
Mecway doesn't output values at integration points, but CCX does with the .dat file (*EL PRINT). I suppose another way would be to interpolate the node values back to the Gauss points using element shape functions. Though I don't know anything abo…
-
Not with the solution formula since it treats the fields as continuous and evaluated at the nodes so element volume wouldn't really make sense. However, the Python API gives access to individual element volumes as well as the integral tool, all fie…
-
Heaviside being greater than 1 (or less than 0) inside quadratic elements at transitions between compression and tension is a consequence of the quadratic elements representing the step function with a quadratic one. The mean and integral tools also…
-
Is m also a constant? If so, you could make a new field variable for the integrand using Solution -> New formula then use the integral tool (Solution -> Volume integral) to integrate that over volume. That way , you don't need to know individu…
-
Since Poisson effect is happening, I'd expect greater stress and plastic strain in tension due to the reduced cross-section area. The curve describes both tension and compression symmetrically since it uses von Mises equivalent stress and a similar…
-
Oh, I understand now. It's only undergoing tension (or compression) with no load reversal so the two hardening models should be equivalent in that region. I don't understand the theory here so I'm not sure if Poisson's ratio is supposed to remain c…
-
@disla, can you be more specific about what's not right? I'm not sure what the different cases in the screenshots are showing or what's wrong with those graphs.
-
Hello Manuel 1) It can be linear. Even if the displacement is large, linear is still OK just to see if its doing rigid body motion. 2) You can use a separate displacement constraint to constrain each translational DOF and a separate node rotation …
-
Sent it! I wish I'd waited though because I'd love Eastbourne - fanciest neighborhood in my city. Not sure what a Bexhill is but it sounds old
-
@DaveStupple. Oh, that's not right. Do you mind sending me the .unv file to try to find the problem and fix it for the next release?
-
@disla. I see. Two hydrostatic pressures with different gravities is more conservative than one hydrostatic pressure using the summed gravity. I guess this might be a problem best solved by a (not yet existing) feature to sum solution values across …
-
@disla, that's interesting regarding multiple gravities. Perhaps it doesn't make physical sense to sum accelerations? Do you think that might cause some sort of impossible/incorrect/ambiguous situation? The multiple gravity loads are internally sum…
-
It's possible that you might be able to just drop in nglib.dll and all its dependencies to the ngmesh or ngmesh6 folder in Mecway. However, I've made some small modifications to Netgen to make it compatible with Mecway so it might not work properly.…
-
You could use nonlinear static analysis for this. If you know the points of contact with the ground, you could put displacement constraints there and a non-zero displacement at the lifting point. If you don't know them, use contact. If you just wan…
-
I don't think so, sorry. You could get thickness using the API but then it's not available for putting into a field variable. 3 material properties are available for formulas - density, E, and specific heat, so if you're not using those for what th…
-
I find it solves with CCX_PARDISO.exe 2.17 dated "niedz., 26 lip 2020 19:57:20" but not with the default CCX.exe 2.17 included with Mecway dated "Wed Jun 16 14:14:29 2021". It may be too big.
-
You shouldn't have any unconstrained degrees of freedom in static analysis. So no pendulums or chains. Either use dynamic response for that or nonlinear static and lower it into equilibrium position in a quasi-static manner such as by constraining i…
-
Element properties -> Truss is set so they're not really beams. However, CCX beams do have a bunch of problems. From the Mecway manual: "The CCX solver (2.17) has some bugs with beam elements. Non-zero displacement constraints on beams can caus…
-
Especially thanks to @prop_design for nagging me about this bug when I wasn't believing it existed :P
-
Hello @mathiasf. I've put my compression-only structure into your model. Adding Flexible joint on beam to both ends makes the whole little assembly behave like a single compression-only truss element. The spacing between the two middle nodes would …
-
There's no technical reason why it couldn't be there. You can arrange beams to connect to the opposite ends of the tension-only member though it's a bit fiddly. Here's an example that also uses an artificial beam with extreme section properties to…
-
That seems pretty poor. Here's my result for: * simple_cube.liml * CCX_PARDISO.exe that shows date "26 lip 2020 19:57:20" with the MKL dlls in Mecway 14. * OMP_NUM_THREADS=12 It's using multiple cores the whole time.
-
If the contact surface is flat, you can use Solution -> Surface integral on the contact stress pressure solution variable and the slave contact surface. Here it shows 1098 N which is pretty close to 1100 N. If the contact has friction, do it a…
-
You can add the EXPLICIT parameter using CCX -> Modify keyword, *DYNAMIC, Set parameter Name EXPLICIT like in the attached example. This example doesn't solve very well and I don't know why. Maybe the time step size is wrong. Also beware that p…
-
Also make sure the mesh is fine enough. You can check that by putting a local refinement at a point on the interface and see if it makes any difference to the stress there. As JohnM said, make sure the curved surface remains curved when you do this.
-
With MKL, also do option 3) here https://mecway.com/forum/discussion/1012/improving-performance-of-ccx-solver which is copying over extra DLLs to enable CPU-specific optimizations which speeds it up over the basic set described with the source code.
